The Index of the Giant's Comments III - We've Left a Banana In Charge

[factotum]

I feel like we are at a real risk of ending up with "Wasn't she named Sally/that's the same character?" lurkers rising from the depths in future appearances.

That's unlikely, IMHO, because the number of people who saw the strip when it still had Sally in it will not increase over time, so you'd expect most of them to have already noticed the change--or, like me, to have never noticed the discrepancy until someone pointed it out in the discussion thread!

[Porthos]

Yeah, I liken this to a corrected spelling mistake, albeit one fixed a couple of months or so after the fact. This should be one for the Forum Community to handle, like other corrected mistakes/minor retcons. No need to point to the fact that Rich pulled a "These aren't the droids you're looking for" joke on his Twitter feed. At least IMO.

IF there was a Community FAQ thread/list/project, that'd be different in my eyes, and I'd consider it for inclusion in something like that. But this? Nayh.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

I say no because it refers to something that no longer exists and therefore doesn't really need to be remembered. While it's an interesting bit of information, the quote itself isn't terribly useful, as most confused people will probably be more set at ease by saying "Nope, she's now called Andi" and linking to that strip than linking to The Giant's Twitter.

[Emanick]

Yeah, put me in the group of people who think that cataloguing that tweet is unnecessary. It was a minor mistake that The Giant corrected. Not important, not that interesting, and nobody needs to know about it.

[Jasdoif]

I think we'd have a much stronger case for including a quote where the Giant clearly said he changed the #951 to say "Andi" instead of "Sally", and why. We do have precedent for including that sort of thing, though a correction wasn't involved there.

With the tweet as indirect as it is, I can't see it being worth including.

[ChristianSt]

I think we'd have a much stronger case for including a quote where the Giant clearly said he changed the #951 to say "Andi" instead of "Sally", and why. We do have precedent for including that sort of thing, though a correction wasn't involved there.

With the tweet as indirect as it is, I can't see it being worth including.

Yeah. I think the reason to not include the Tweet because it is really dodge. Out of context it contains no information.
Rich says (word for word!) "I have no idea what you're talking about". I don't think that there is an useful discussion where that quote would be helpful to anyone.

If Rich had said "I changed that panel", then that would be something we imo should be included.

[Kish]

I still wouldn't say so. "Rich changed a panel once"? How is that useful information? I suppose someone at some point may argue that Rich never-never changes the comic once it's been uploaded...

[Porthos]

Yeah. I think the reason to not include the Tweet because it is really dodge. Out of context it contains no information.
Rich says (word for word!) "I have no idea what you're talking about". I don't think that there is an useful discussion where that quote would be helpful to anyone.

It's more a joke than a dodge ("I have no idea what you're talking about" is what a lot of people say after they've [surreptitiously] changed something and then try to claim that something has always been like that). But I agree with the larger point of not including it, obviously.

[orrion]

Yeah. I think the reason to not include the Tweet because it is really dodge. Out of context it contains no information.
Rich says (word for word!) "I have no idea what you're talking about". I don't think that there is an useful discussion where that quote would be helpful to anyone.

If Rich had said "I changed that panel", then that would be something we imo should be included.

Still wouldn't include it. It's just not useful information for anything. We don't include the quotes where he fixes minor art errors (like Belkar's - or was it Haley's - arm appearing transparent or something in one of the recent comics). There's no reason to include minor textual errors, either.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Still wouldn't include it. It's just not useful information for anything. We don't include the quotes where he fixes minor art errors (like Belkar's - or was it Haley's - arm appearing transparent or something in one of the recent comics). There's no reason to include minor textual errors, either.

Yeah, I agree with this. We don't really need information on whether or not there was a change unless that information includes an explanation of why there was a mistake or change.

[DaggerPen]

Well, I know when I'm outvoted. I'll admit that the quote itself was rather ambiguous - I just picked it because I thought enough people had caught on to the Sally confusion, but it seems not! Points conceded.

[137beth]

I certainly don't want to catalogue every mistake poor Giant makes, but given the amount of discussion over this in the 961 thread, I feel like we are at a real risk of ending up with "Wasn't she named Sally/that's the same character?" lurkers rising from the depths in future appearances.

In one of the strips Kilkil was missing from a panel for a short period of time, and someone pointed it out in the discussion thread. The Giant responded with a similar comment and fixed it. I recall bringing it up in the Index, and the consensus was that it didn't belong in the index since no one would ever see the "incorrect" panel again.

[ReaderAt2046]

I vote not to keep the quote on fixing the panel.

[Dr. Gamera]

From Twitter:

The higher priority for the holiday season is Blood Runs in the Family, but there's also a chance of a 2015 OOTS calendar.

[Emanick]

From Twitter:

The higher priority for the holiday season is Blood Runs in the Family, but there's also a chance of a 2015 OOTS calendar.

We should definitely remove this as soon as the holiday season is over, but I agree with adding it until then.

[Jasdoif]

From Twitter:

The higher priority for the holiday season is Blood Runs in the Family, but there's also a chance of a 2015 OOTS calendar.

I don't know...seems awfully transient for inclusion. Especially since I'm 99.bananasfoster% sure we'll see a news item if/when a 2015 calendar or Blood Runs in the Family become available.

[Gwynfrid]

I don't know...seems awfully transient for inclusion. Especially since I'm 99.bananasfoster% sure we'll see a news item if/when a 2015 calendar or Blood Runs in the Family become available.

I agree. Besides, it's not like the Giant was tweeting dozens of times every day and burying old news. This one will remain visible for a while.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

I don't know...seems awfully transient for inclusion. Especially since I'm 99.bananasfoster% sure we'll see a news item if/when a 2015 calendar or Blood Runs in the Family become available.

I'm going to agree with this. We had a news post for the stuff he was releasing last time, and I'd imagine we would have a similar one again. I also prefer to have quotes in the Index that would have a little longer relevance.

[137beth]

I don't think something so temporary that will be made obsolete in a few months needs to be included.

[Yendor]

Literally nobody living worships Hel.

[thatSeniorGuy]

And there's a reason for that, which we'll be learning about sometime.

[Porthos]

Literally nobody living worships Hel.

Absolutely needed, IMO, as it addresses one of the long standing debates in the forum. That is, was Durkon correct about Hel, was he being metaphorical, or was he misinformed?

As an aside, turns out I was wrong on which of the three it was. Oh well. Not the first time and won't be the last.

And there's a reason for that, which we'll be learning about sometime.

Eh, maybe. Doesn't seem quite as important in my eyes as the first one. I'm willing to be convinced, however.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Absolutely needed, IMO, as it addresses one of the long standing debates in the forum. That is, was Durkon correct about Hel, was he being metaphorical, or was he misinformed?

As an aside, turns out I was wrong on which of the three it was. Oh well. Not the first time and won't be the last.

Agreed. It will be nice to able to answer that one when it pops up. I was wrong as well, it appears.

As for the second quote, I think it's a little too vague (and will only be necessary until that strip) to be included.

[Kish]

Yeah, while I think the implication of Rich's comment is 1) pretty clear and 2) just as thatSenionGuy paraphrased it...I'm opposed to immortalizing implications.

[Bird]

Second quote seems reasonable as a "see also" to me. No need to paraphrase its content, though I also agree 100% with thatSeniorGuy's interpretation.

The argument that the quote will become irrelevant eventually is valid, but we don't know if the Giant will address this issue next strip or in four years.

[thatSeniorGuy]

Second quote seems reasonable as a "see also" to me. No need to paraphrase its content, though I also agree 100% with thatSeniorGuy's interpretation.

The argument that the quote will become irrelevant eventually is valid, but we don't know if the Giant will address this issue next strip or in four years.

Yeah, that was my thinking - I agree that the quote will eventually be unnecessary ... but we don't know how long it will take, and in the meantime I think it's a good addition to the index. I also agree that it fits more of a "see also" to the first quote than as a standalone.

[The Linker]

I would agree that a common follow-up question to "No one worships Hel," would be "Literally no one? Did he ever say why?" And I don't think there's any harm in attaching a little "We'll find out why someday" link to the first quote's entry. It doesn't add any bloat or anything -- just five more words, to be taken out when that comic comes. Why not?

[Gwynfrid]

Second quote seems reasonable as a "see also" to me. No need to paraphrase its content, though I also agree 100% with thatSeniorGuy's interpretation.

The argument that the quote will become irrelevant eventually is valid, but we don't know if the Giant will address this issue next strip or in four years.

I agree. On top of that, the Giant's way of putting it is funny. I like the quote just for that.

[137beth]

Second quote seems reasonable as a "see also" to me. No need to paraphrase its content, though I also agree 100% with thatSeniorGuy's interpretation.

The argument that the quote will become irrelevant eventually is valid, but we don't know if the Giant will address this issue next strip or in four years.

These are exactly my thoughts. There are other quotes that will be made obsolete eventually, but possibly not for a long, long time.

[Jasdoif]

I would agree that a common follow-up question to "No one worships Hel," would be "Literally no one? Did he ever say why?" And I don't think there's any harm in attaching a little "We'll find out why someday" link to the first quote's entry. It doesn't add any bloat or anything -- just five more words, to be taken out when that comic comes. Why not?

I agree. The second quote doesn't have much standalone value, but as a see-also to the other quote I don't see why we shouldn't include it.

And if I'm not mistaken, that brings us up to seven quotes (across six entries).

---

UPDATE COMING, CALLING FOR PMs TO REQUIRE VOTES

Anyone thinking some/all entries marked "Accepting PMs to require vote" should not be included in the Index should send me a private message, saying which entries should require a vote. (The default is to include, an item not voted on will be included in the Index.) If I get PMs from two or more people about a particular entry, it will be voted on to decide inclusion; the vote will be the next stage, and I'll announce it when the vote is ready.

Five of the quotes below reached strong consensus already. A vote is considered unnecessary in these cases, so they will be included.

Proposed Items for Index 3.5
The Giant on Stats in Earlier Strips Elan singing about skill points, Haley having Rapid Shot and Manyshot, Roy and Vaarsuvius' mental ability scores, verbal components in OOTS, and insight about Vaarsuvius' spellcasting.	#180	05/14/2005	No vote required, will be included.
Evolution of D&D Adherence The Giant hasn't made explicit statements about feats/items since 2008, OOTS' internal consistency is still maintained, and the Giant has no regrets about using D&D in OOTS.	#886	05/09/2013	No vote required, will be included.
Xykon vs Dorukan There would be no dramatic function to drawing out the fight. "If it helps, think of that page as a montage scene rather than a direct moment-to-moment narrative."	#960	08/18/2014	No vote required, will be included.
Malack is Ash Vampires take their gear with them when they assume gaseous form, but not when they're destroyed.	#906	07/28/2013	Accepting PMs to require vote. No vote required, will be included.
The Kickstarter Cameo It hasn't happened yet. "When it happens, I will almost certainly mention it in the News."	#869	02/14/2013	No vote required, will be included.
Hel Has No Living Worshippers "That means literally not one single living person, ever." We'll find out why someday.	#962	09/11/2014	No vote required, will be included.

PMs will be accepted until September 14th, 4PM EDT. I'll try to update the table if/when entries get sufficient PMs.

To send me a PM, click my username (The vaguely-pronounceable(?)-looking word above the spellcasting-and-invocation-using banana with purple hair) and select "Private Message". Or I guess you could click here. Anyway, include the titles of the entries you're nominating in the message. Mentioning something about "Index Nomination" in the subject line would be helpful.

A few final reminders:

• Don't post suggestions to require votes. They're sent by PM to avoid filling up the thread with them, posts will not be counted.
• Only PM for entries you think should be excluded. They'll be included if they don't receive sufficient nominations.
• We're not voting on the entries yet. The voting will be the next stage, assuming a vote is required; I'll call for the vote at an appropriate time.
• We've left a banana in charge. Hi.

Further discussion of entries is encouraged at this point. In particular, recommendations for different titles and descriptions for the quote entries are things I'd be happy to consider.

---

Yes, I'm aware there's only one entry marked "Accepting PMs to require vote", so I'd be able to figure out which entry is being referred to without its title in the PM...and for that matter, that I could use "entry" instead of "entries" throughout the section above. I still feel the update process needs to be handled consistently, more of the sake of everyone else than for myself.